Earlier quoted context omitted.
You know nothing about markets or real life market engagement if you blindly believe "competition is always good for consumers". There are costs to competition, inherently. Competition is only of benefit to consumers if they capture the more of the new surplus utility generated by competition than they capture the new costs. There will be marketing costs, there will be the costs of the data policies of these new mode…
Curious about this answer. Do you have any example in which prices of goods and services actually went up after more competition entered an industry? In case you do, are you sure you aren't cherry picking?
Markets where competition works really well are elastic and have consumers with the appropriate amount of engagements from the consumers.